The Divisional Manager, The New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Tushar and others. Miscellaneous First Appeal 22058/2011 decided on 1 October 2020.
Judgement Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/348033/1/MFA21930-12-01-10-2020.pdf
Relevant paragraphs: Facts. The rider borrowed motorcycle from its owner and while riding the motorcycle, he lost control and dashed against road side stone and died. The legal representatives of the rider claimed compensation under Section 163A of the Act making owner of the motorcycle and insurer as parties. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 4,58,000/-. This award was challenged before the Hon’ble High Court.
13. Question for consideration: “Whether the rider of the vehicle involved in the accident who is not the owner would be entitled to a compensation in a claim under Section 163A of the Act, if so, to what extent?”
25.The issue in the case on hand is not with regard to plea of negligence. Hence, the entire line of judgments relied on by the learned counsel for the claimants are inapplicable to the facts of the case on hand. The issue concerning whether rider of the vehicle who is not the owner would be entitled to compensation is laid down by the Apex Court in Ningamma and Another (supra), wherein the Apex Court held as follows:………In the present case, the deceased was not the owner of the motorbike in question He borrowed the said motorbike from its real owner. The deceased cannot be held to be an employee of the owner of the motorbike although he was authorized to drive the said vehicle by its owner and, therefore, he would step into the shoes of the owner of the motorbike. We have already extracted Section 163-A of the MVA hereinbefore. A bare perusal of the said provision would make it explicitly clear that persons like the deceased in the present case would step into the shoes of the owner of the vehicle.….if it is proved that the driver is the owner of the motor vehicle, in that case the owner could not himself be a recipient of compensation as the liability to pay the same is on him.……Accordingly, the legal representatives of the deceased who have stepped into the shoes of the owner of the motor vehicle could not have claimed compensation under Section 163-A of the MVA.…..However, at the same time, even as per the contract of insurance, in case of personal accident the owner driver is entitled to a sum of Rs.1 lakh. Therefore, the deceased, as observed hereinabove, who would be in the shoes of the owner shall be entitled to a sum of Rs.1 lakh, even as per the contract of insurance.
28. In terms of the afore-extracted law laid down by the Apex Court, it becomes unmistakably clear that the rider of the vehicle, if he is not the owner, but has borrowed the vehicle from the owner steps into the shoes of the owner and would be entitled to compensation only to the extent of the contract between the owner and the insurer.
29. In the light of the compensation under P.A. covers to the owner being only Rs.1,00,000/-, the rider of the vehicle in MVC No.440/2008 cannot be entitled to a compensation which could be more than Rs.1,00,000/-, in terms of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the afore-stated cases, as he steps into the shoes of the owner and would be entitled a compensation only of Rs.1,00,000/- as against Rs.4,58,000/- determined by the Tribunal.
Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal.
Daksha Legal 